2016 hud coc nofa process debrief session

2017 HUD CoC NOFA

Debrief Input SessionOakland City Hall, Public Hearing Room 3

February 27, 2018

1pm-3:30pm

Agenda1. Welcome and Introductions - Agenda

2. 2017 NOFA Local and National results: Brief Overview

3. 2017 NOFA Process

1. Overview

2. Feedback

4. Looking Ahead: New and Proposed 2018 NOFA Local

Renewal Review Process

5. Community Input

6. Next Steps and Wrap Up

2017 Local and National

Results: Brief Overview

Local and National Results:Outcomes Results of Local Process

• The 2017 ALCO local process completed with a total of 50

projects.

➢ 45 projects fully in Tier 1

➢ 1 project straddled the line of Tier 1 and Tier 2

➢ 4 projects fully in Tier 2, including 2 renewals and 2 new

• Total 2017 ALCO funding request = $35,839,404

• On January 11, 2018, HUD announced the 2017 Continuum of

Care competition funding awards. ALCO was awarded a total of

$35,327,971 for its combined Tier 1, Tier 2, Coordinated Entry,

and CoC planning projects.


• We received the third largest award in California, after Los Angeles

($109,398,295) and San Francisco CoCs awards ($41,476,960).

• On February 14th, HUD responded to EOH that CoC full debriefings

will be available to CoCs after the final funding announcement for

all CoCs. HUD anticipates this debriefing won't be available until

Spring of 2018.

• EOH Staff will include HUD CoC Full debriefing and analysis prior to

Bidder’s Conference in late Spring/early Summer.


• All renewals funded including Tier 2 projects, except

for one. Redwood Hills, a 28-unit affordable family

housing project under development (six PSH units

under this grant) ranked at the bottom of Tier 2 and

was not renewed by HUD. HMIS, Coordinated Entry, and

the CoC Planning grant were awarded.

• Renewal rental assistance projects were increased by

a combined total of $1,484,942, due to HUD’s FMR

adjustments.


• Two traditional TH projects which proposed

reallocation as TH-RRH projects were awarded: City of

Oakland’s Matilda Cleveland and Families in Transition.

These will be our first TH-RRH Joint Component

projects, and will add rapid rehousing slots to our

continuum.

• Bonus Projects were not funded. Two new projects

proposed by the City of Berkeley, Pathway Bridges (a

proposed new TH-RRH project) and Coach Expansion

(new PSH expansion), were not funded in this round.

Overview of the 2017

NOFA Process

Overview of the 2017 Process:

Strategic Direction from HUD CoC

Specific 2017 Strategic Recommendations from the HUD CoCCommittee as informed by community input process:

Reallocation of general purpose TH into TH/RRH:

Pursue reallocation that strengthens our system and application package and is aligned with our guiding principles

Continue to utilize strategies already in use:

1. Maintaining a minimum scoring threshold to continue the reallocation of low performing projects regardless of project type-consistent with prior reallocation processes

2. Inviting voluntary reallocation

Overview of the 2017 Process:

Strategic Direction from HUD CoCSpecific 2017 Strategic Recommendations from the HUD CoCCommittee as informed by community input process:

Strive to have 90% of PSH project beds either 100% dedicated to the chronically homeless or to the new HUD definition of PSH DedicatedPLUS.

Solicit applications for bonus projects, and open to expansion and new bonus projects.

Limit revisions to the local applications to those that increase clarity, reduce work load and/or incorporate the above recommendations.

Utilize the same guiding principles as the 2016 NOFA round

Local Feedback on the

2017 Process

Local Feedback on the 2017 Process

Improve and Retain

In October, EveryOne Home released a survey for the community to provide

feedback on the 2017 local process, with a total of 13 responses (grantees (8)

and scorers (4)). Respondents gave EOH an overall satisfaction rate of 3.3 of 5.

EOH also received a letter of concern with feedback from a grantee, and

interviewed other projects post NOFA. Major themes from that feedback are in

the box below, with more in depth descriptions in the following slides.

IMPROVE RETAIN

Timing Staff Support

Calculations and Scoring FAQ Process

Exits to Homelessness biased

against PSH

Ability to include additional data

Cost effectiveness calculation

Local Feedback on the 2017 Process:

Improve TimingTiming:

Build in more time

Initial draft (of Local Application) ahead of time

Test application and score ahead of time

We are proposing to shift into the 2018 NOFA Process and assess

Renewals’ objective criteria and offer monitoring TA/Site visits

assistance before HUD NOFA’s release, which will alleviate

some of the pressure within the tight NOFA timeline

In addition, the 2018 NOFA proposal follows some procedures of

neighboring CoC’s, which have an easier and more accessible

process for renewals (Local Feedback from NOFA 2016)


Improve Calculations and Scorings

Calculations and Scoring:

Design an excel spreadsheet that makes all calculations

Provide consistent scoring

Formula problematic, scoring inconsistent

Significant errors in the way the RFP instructed applicants to do the

calculations

EOH proposes to use an EOH-designed APR Tool to download APR’s for

easy readability and to auto calculate downloaded APR files. This tool

seeks to eliminate errors in formulas and prior inconsistent scoring.


Improve Exits to Homelessness OutcomeExits to Homelessness metric is biased against PSH

Exits to homelessness (Outcome D) is bias against PSH

Comparing PSH ‘exits to homelessness’ and RRH ‘returns to homelessness’ is problematic

During the reporting period only 7 people moved out (of 360 total served), 5 of those moved into other permanent housing. But because 2 people out of the 7 moving, and of the 360 served, went into transitional housing, we were penalized 10 points

EOH is proposing to increase the threshold for PSH Exits to Homelessness from <10% to <25%. It will give more opportunities to PSH programs with small number of total exits to increase their score under this measure


Improve Cost Effectiveness

Cost Effectiveness

We had problems with the Cost Effectiveness metric.

The cost effectiveness calculation is meaningless. The community raised concerns about cost effectiveness last year, but it was included again this year.

Some programs indicated they feel the cost effectiveness measure compares pears with apples

HUD CoC Committee has just approved their 2018 Work Plan, which includes the formation of a Cost Effectiveness workgroup to: 1) have an improved metric by the time of NOFA Release and; 2) obtain consensus to meet RBA Goals (how much does it cost per service/outcome). This work group will be convene in April/May.


Retain Staff Support, FAQ process and

additional dataStaff Support:

Easy, extra staff support

Staff’s supplemental information/instructions very useful

Thanks for all of staff’s hard work!

FAQs:

FAQ process was clearer and responsive

Generated emails for FAQ postings were helpful

Ability to include additional data:

Several grantees appreciated the ability to include additional data to explain underscoring in certain areas

Looking Ahead:

2018 NOFA Local Renewal Review Process

For the 2018 NOFA Process, EOH is proposing to spread out its

NOFA Local Application into three (3) stages:

Stage 1. Renewals’ Project Evaluation: Objective criteria

will be scored by EOH staff in early Spring (end of 1st

Quarter) - with the NOFA committee approving Scoring

Tools and Criteria proposed

Stage 2. Project Monitoring TA/Site Visits for low scoring

projects or upon request during the 2nd Quarter

Stage 3. A Local Application for New/Renewal Projects

after NOFA is released in the 3rd Quarter

2018 NOFA Process

Stage 1 - Project Evaluation Project Evaluation for Objective Criteria

Annual Performance Reports (APRs) from renewal projects to

provide scoring for the following existing objective criteria: Target

Population and Severe Needs, Performance Outcomes (A-D),

Capacity and Utilization, and HMIS Data Quality utilizing EOH

Target Population Report and new APR tool.

The following objective criteria submitted via additional

documentation: Housing First documents; Reports and Invoicing;

Site Control (site-based projects - scattered site PSH & RRH

exempt), and Fiscal Management.

Proof of Eligibility, which was a Narrative (subjective), previously

scored by the NOFA Committee in 2017, is proposed as a new

objective criteria, maintaining its 5 pts. maximum score.

2018 NOFA Process

Stage 1 - Project Evaluation Project Evaluation Report

EOH will assess each Project Evaluation Package submittal,

and provide a Report with preliminary scores worth 2/3 of

applicants total points to grantees and next steps

Objective Criteria score sheets will be made available upon

request after release of Project Evaluation Reports.

Applicants will then have 2 business days to report

mathematical errors and any discrepancies in their score

sheets to EOH Staff

2018 NOFA ProcessStage 2 - Project Monitoring TA/Site Visits

Project Monitoring TA/Site Visits

Project Applications who receive a low score in any of

the following areas: Housing First, Performance

Outcomes A-D, Proof of Eligibility, Capacity and

Utilization, HMIS Data Quality, or Fiscal Management

may be contacted by EveryOne Home staff to schedule

a Monitoring TA/Site Visit for support and assistance.

Projects may also elect to request a TA/Site Visit to

improve scoring during the Local Application stage.

2018 NOFA Process

Stage 3 - Local Application

Renewals will complete a simpler Local Application, which will include two objective scores (Cost Effectiveness and Underspending), fewer Narratives (Housing First and Quality Assurance), and additional Narratives for low scoring sections, after projects receive TA/Site Visit support.

Proposal to add New Questions (not scored in 2018):

Compliance with Equal Access Rule required by HUD (LGBT and Families)

Client Feedback process as part of Housing First requirements

Community and Client Engagement, including

relationships and/or MOU with schools or projects to meet children’s educational needs (for family/youth projects).

whether project offers volunteer/work opportunities to clients/tenants or links them with jobs/vocational programs.

2018 NOFA Process

Stage 3 - Local Application

New projects will respond with a full Local Application, consistent

with some of the new criteria of the 2018 Local Renewal Process as

adopted by the NOFA Committee.

After the NOFA is released, the Local Application and corresponding

documents will be updated to address any unexpected changes or

additional HUD requirements.

All changes will be approved by the NOFA Committee.

2018 NOFA Process

Project Evaluation Package

The Project Evaluation Package (to be released on 3/23) will

contain:

Project Coversheet – Populated by EOH with basic

information for each Project

Project Evaluation Form

EveryHome (EOH) Target Population Report and Instructions

New EveryHome (EOH) APR Tool and Instructions

Any required supporting materials and documentation

Project

Evaluation

Package -

Coversheet

2018 EveryOne Home Project Performance Evaluation Project Coversheet

Project Name: Spirit of Hope I

Alternative Project Names (ex: HMIS, HIC, etc):

Applicant Name: Alameda County Housing and Community Development (HCD) Dept.

Person Authorized to submit or withdraw application and certify participation in Coordinated Entry: Linda Gardner, Director HCD

Project Start Date: 2/1/2002

End of Current HUD Grant: 1/31/2018

Grant Number: CA0119L9T021609

Project Status: Renewing

Application Amount: $51,685

Match Amount:

Match Amount Funding Source(s):

Primary Activity Type & Target Population: Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) // Families

Rental Assistance: No

HUD Priorities: DedicatedPLUS

Number of CoC-funded units:

Project

Evaluation

Package -

Coversheet

Project Description: Operating support for eight units of PSH to

residents residing in repurposed Navy Housing at Alameda Point

Collaborative (APC). APC was established in 1999 out of the base

closure homeless accommodation. APC is committed to integrating

trauma informed principles of safety, transparency and empowered

choice while providing housing and support services to homeless

households who want and need support to sustain permanent

housing. Onsite, sustainable social enterprises provide job

opportunities, income, and a chance to serve the community as all

enterprises employ residents in either trainee or permanent work

positions. Children and youth programs provide academic and

emotional support.

Site Owned/Long-term lease: 59-year lease began in 1999. Rebuild

of additional 67 units’ groundbreaking in 2021.

2018 NOFA Process

Project Evaluation Package Project Evaluation Package – APR Tools

EveryHome (EOH) Target Population Report and Instructions

HUD Priorities: Target Populations and Severity of Needs

criteria will be assessed by the EOH Target Population Report

Tool (same as in 2017) with updated running instructions.

Projects not in HMIS (e.g. DV providers): there will be another

set of instructions for how to provide the data requested.

2018 NOFA Process

Project Evaluation Package Project Evaluation Package – APR Tools

New EveryHome (EOH) APR Tool and Instructions

EOH has built an APR Tool to allow easy readability and the

automatic calculation of downloaded APR files (and for some

project types, i.e., RRH, TAY TH, and TH-RRH system

performance reports for returns to homelessness) for the

following objective criteria scores: Performance Outcomes

(A-D), Capacity and Utilization, and HMIS Data Quality

Tool will be tested several times prior to inclusion in Project

Evaluation Package

Projects not in HMIS (e.g. DV providers): there will be another

set of instructions for how to provide the data requested

NOFA 2018 Process:

Summary of Changes Proposed

NOFA Process: 3 Stages

Stage 1. Project Evaluation for Objective Criteria – Renewal Projects (Spring)

Stage 2. Project Monitoring TA/Site Visits for low performing scoring (late

Spring)

Stage 3. Local Application – Simple for Renewals/Full for New Projects (post

NOFA)

NOFA 2018 Process:


Project Evaluation Scored Criteria (up to 79 points)

Primary Activity Type = up to 5 pts Reports and Invoicing – 10 pt

Target Pop and Severe Needs = 10 pts Capacity and Utilization – 5 pts

Housing First (docs) = 6 pts Proof of Eligibility* - 5 pts

Outcome Performance – 32 pts HMIS Data Quality – 2 pts

Fiscal Management – 4 pts

NOFA 2018 Process:


Changes in Objective Criteria

Outcome D – PSH Exits to Homelessness – Proposed increase in threshold from <10

to <25%

Proof of Eligibility – Propose to be scored as objective criteria, retaining 5 pts

maximum

NOFA 2018 Process:


New Questions – Not Scored in 2018

Compliance with Equal Access

Rule

Required by HUD (LGBT and

Families)

Client Feedback process Housing First requirement

Community and Client

Engagement

Project has relationships - MOU

with schools or projects to meet

children’s educational needs

Project offers volunteer/work

opportunities to clients/tenants or

links them with vocational

programs.

Affirm 2018 Guiding Principles:

Established by the Community in 2013 and reaffirmed and updated by the HUD CoC Committee in 2017:

Maximize the resources available to community

Package submitted will align with HUD priorities in order to meet local needs

Prioritize ensuring existing residential capacity and housing stability is maintained system-wide

Keep the renewal process as simple as possible

Continue to emphasize project performance and the submission of projects that will meet HUD’s thresholds

Support individual projects seeking to reallocate or reclassify where relevant

Facilitate a clear, fair and transparent local process

Community Input Session

➢ 2018 Proposed NOFA Process in 3 Phases

➢ Outcome D = Increase the threshold from <10% to <25%

➢ Change Client Eligibility from subjective to objective

criteria as defined below:➢ Project has written policy which clearly describes participant

eligibility and funding sources = 2 points

➢ Project has clear, written procedures for staff verification of

participant eligibility documentation and homeless history = 3

points


➢ Introduce 3 New Questions (Renewals and New Projects)

not scored in 2018:

Compliance with Equal Access Rule required by HUD (LGBT and

Families)

Client Feedback process as part of the Housing First requirements

Community and Client Engagement, which will include a

description of:

relationships and/or MOU with schools or projects to meet

children’s educational needs (for family/youth projects).

whether project offers volunteer/work opportunities to

clients/tenants or links them with vocational programs.


➢ For Projects with less than a year of operation, what

feels fair for scoring purposes? Maintain their rank or

maintain their score? Do we want some progress criteria,

or do we do it automatically?


2018 NOFA Process: Next Steps

Mar. 13

NOFA Committee meets and approves the Project Evaluation Criteria and scoring tool

Mar. 23

Project tool is released

Mar. 23 – Mar. 30

FAQ/Technical Support period

Apr. 24

Deadline for submitting Project Evaluation

Apr. 30

Projects informed of their preliminary scores

June 1

TA/site visits begin

Thank you!

2016 hud coc nofa process debrief session

Documents